Informed viewers,
welcome to this week’s
edition of Planet Earth:
Our Loving Home,
the first in a two-part
series featuring
acclaimed US
environmental scientist,
Dr. Robert Goodland,
who will discuss
how animal product
production and
consumption
causes climate change.

Regarded as
the “Conscience of
the World Bank,”
Dr. Goodland served
the Bank as a senior
environmental advisor
for 23 years.
Currently
he is a senior fellow
at the World Resources
Institute, a non-profit
global think tank that
conducts environmental
research and provides
solutions to governments,
companies and
communities regarding
ecology-related issues.

He has authored
or co-authored numerous
books on sustainable
economic development
and the environment,
serves as
Metropolitan Chair of
the Ecological Society of
America, and is
the past president of the
International Association
for Impact Assessment.
In 2008, he received the
first International Union
for Conservation of
Nature’s Coolidge Medal
for his outstanding
contributions to
environmental conservation.

In October 2011,
the Gwangju NGO
Global Forum was held
at South Korea’s Chonnam
National University
and featured a talk
by Dr. Goodland entitled
““Food and
Climate Change: Risk
and Opportunity for
Korea and the World.”
The event was part of the
2011 Gwangju Summit
of the Urban Environment
Accords where mayors
and professionals from
more than 100 cities
around the world
gathered in Gwangju City
to discuss pressing
environmental issues
facing urban areas.

Some of the
distinguished attendees
included Lester Brown,
founder and president
of the US-based
Earth Policy Institute,
Amina Mohamed,
Deputy Executive Director
of the United Nations
Environment Program,
and Dr. Joan Clos,
Executive Director of the
United Nations Human
Settlements Program
(UN-HABITAT).
We now present excerpts
from an interview with
Dr. Goodland and
his talk in South Korea.

I think most of us agree
that climate catastrophe
is the biggest problem,
the biggest predicament
facing civilization today.
(South) Korean
greenhouse gas emissions
are steadily rising.
In 2005, (South) Korea
emitted 490-million tons.
By 2010,
it was 570-million tons.
By 2015, it’s predicted
to be 604-million tons
and so on.
This is what’s causing
climate change.
The worldwide level of
atmospheric greenhouse
gases that’s agreed
to be safe is
350 parts per million.
Those of you who
were here and heard
Lester Brown saw
this huge badge he had
on his jacket.
It said “350.”
That’s the goal,
350 parts per million of
greenhouse gas.

But most unfortunately,
last year, the world’s
average concentration
already exceeded 350.
It’s 390 right now.
So we have to get back to
a safe level, and
we don’t have long.
Several people asked
Lester Brown how long
we’ve got to get back
to a safe level.
He said,
"Well, no one knows,
but not as long as
most people think."
Now, whether that’s
five years or maybe
at the outside 10,
it’s a very short time to
make the huge changes
required in our civilization
to prevent
climate catastrophe.

A forthcoming report by
the United Nations
Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change
entitled “Special Report
on Managing the Risks of
Extreme Events and
Disasters to Advance
Climate Change
Adaptation” states that
in coming years extreme
weather-related events
such as the 2011
wide-scale flooding
in Thailand and
the harsh droughts in
the Horn of Africa will
become more frequent.

Also,
the Human Development
Report 2011 by
the United Nations
Development Program
includes a stern warning
that without drastic action,
the economic growth
of developing countries
could be halted or severely
reduced by 2050.
Massive biodiversity loss,
fast-rising sea levels,
immense food shortages,
quickly-disappearing
polar ice caps and glaciers,
raging wildfires
and millions of
climate refugees are just
a few of the other
dire consequences
of climate change.
However when it comes
to taking action
on humanity’s
most daunting challenge,
investing in clean energy
is the usual response.
Dr. Goodland asks that
we re-think this solution.

The biggest answer that
most people think
will help prevent
climate catastrophe is
a massive switch from
fossil fuel, that’s coal,
gas, oil, from fossil fuel
over to sustainable energy,
wind, solar, tidal,
geothermal,
some small hydro maybe.
But that transition
from fossil fuel to
sustainable energy,
it’s essential but it’s too slow.
Whatever you do,
it’s going to take
at least 20 years
from 2010 to 2030, and
most scientists say you
cannot wait until 2030.

Changing from fossil fuel
to sustainable energy,
while essential,
is not going to prevent
climate catastrophe.
The carbon dioxide
that’s already
in the atmosphere lasts
hundreds of years.
So we have to get
a faster way to prevent
climate change than
the transition
from fossil fuels to
sustainable energy.

The research of
Dr. Goodland and
other scientific experts
concludes that livestock
production is what
needs to be addressed
immediately to
halt climate change.

Most people don’t know
the huge scale of
global livestock.
The population of
land-based animals
has grown six-fold
since 1960.
So this climbing up
the food chain is a fairly
recent phenomenon
in the world.
In 2009,
60-billion livestock
animals were raised,
60-billion were killed and
60-billion were eaten
by us.

Now, a full one-quarter
of all land worldwide is
used for livestock grazing.
One-third of all farmable
land is now used for
growing livestock feed
like soybeans.
The Amazon rainforest
has been destroyed
for cattle ranching
and feed production.
Most of (South) Korea’s
beef comes from the
Amazon rainforest and
most of (South) Korea’s
pig food and chicken feed.

The 2006 United Nations
Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO)
report, “Livestock’s
Long Shadow”
estimated that
the livestock industry is
responsible for 18%
of human-induced global
greenhouse-gas emissions.

The report
examined the end-to-end
emissions attributable
to the livestock industry,
including those
from producing fertilizer,
growing food crops
for livestock
and raising, killing,
processing, refrigerating
and transporting
animals for food.
Dr. Goodland
and his colleague,
Jeff Anhang
re-examined the data
presented in “Livestock’s
Long Shadow” regarding
the amount of greenhouse
gases being generated by
the industry and arrived
at a different conclusion.
Their findings are in the
2009 article “Livestock
and Climate Change”
that was published in
World Watch Magazine.

Just raising cattle
with their respiration
and other parts of
the livestock production
cycle increases
the greenhouse gas
immensely.

FAO calculated that only
18% of anthropic
greenhouse gas is produced
by the livestock sector.
Jeff Anhang and I
recalculated FAO’s 18%
and we found
it was more like 51%.
In other words,
a huge difference.
How come there is such
a huge difference between
FAO’s figure and ours?
Well, it’s not easy to say,
but it’s all in detail
in the Table 1 of our
World Watch article.

I took FAO's calculation
and dissected it into
all its many small parts.
If you look at
the WorldWatch article,
Table 1, we have found
about 10 discrepancies
in the calculation of FAO.
And when you put all
those small discrepancies
together, they add up
to 51%, up from FAO's
calculation of 18%.

The biggest one that
FAO omitted was
the respiration of
the six-billion livestock
animals that are killed
every year.
They all respire, and that
contains carbon dioxide.
And, they didn't
include that.
Most cattle come from
the Amazon forest.
People cut down
the Amazon forest.
The effect of that is
it reduces
the greenhouse-gas
sequestration capacity
of the forest.

Second, they burn
the forest, which emits
a huge amount of
greenhouse gas.
Then they raise cattle.
Their belches,
and respiration
increase greenhouse gas.
And then in the lifecycle
of livestock,
refrigeration, transport,
and things like that
also emit much more
greenhouse gas.
In addition,
much Amazon forest
is cut down
not for livestock ranches
but for livestock feed.
And this livestock feed,
a lot comes into (South)
Korea, a lot goes to
feed Chinese pigs.
And so that's
a huge amount of extra
greenhouse gas from
the livestock process.

Greenpeace Brazil points
out that the livestock
industry is responsible
for about 80% of
Amazon deforestation.
The world’s forests
store approximately
289 gigatons of
carbon dioxide
in trees and vegetation.
Dr. Goodland estimates
that at least 200 tons of
carbon are released into
the atmosphere for
each hectare of forest
cleared or burned,
whereas moderately
degraded grassland can
store just eight tons
per hectare.

Cutting
the Amazon rainforest
has huge implications
for climate change.
The Amazon forest
in general is the biggest
carbon sink the world
has ever known,
terrestrial sink.
I think the oceans
are slightly bigger.
But if you cut down
the forest, you reduce the
capacity of that carbon
sink to sequester carbon.
Not only do you reduce
the carbon absorption of
the forest, but when
the forest is burned,
having been cut to
create cattle pasture,
that releases enormous
amounts of
greenhouse gases
into the atmosphere.

The article “Livestock
and Climate Change”
addresses why livestock
cannot be considered as
a repository
for carbon by stating:
“Even if one considers
the standing mass of
livestock as a carbon sink,
by the FAO’s
own estimate,
the amount of carbon
stored in livestock is
trivial compared to the
amount stored in forest
cleared to create space
for growing feed
and grazing livestock.”

Now, so much forest
is being cut down, the
photosynthetic absorptive
capacity of the world
has been reduced.
And so the old concept of
the beautifully balanced
ying and yang
carbon cycle, where
photosynthesis perfectly
balances respiration,
that's all
out of the window.
Humanity has managed
to break the carbon cycle,
and not many people
admit it, yet.

In the end,
only immediately
changing the way
we all eat will solve
our world’s climate crisis.

And now we come to,
I hope, the solution.
What are the alternatives
to animal-food-centric
diets?

Climatically effective
alternatives to
eating livestock include
any plant-based foods.
If you find it difficult
to make a transition
from meat, then you can
eat meat analogs.

Our sincere thanks,
Dr. Robert Goodland,
for your invaluable
scientific research that
clearly demonstrates that
the production and
consumption of
animal products is
the primary driver of
climate change and
deeply threatens the
future of all civilization.
May the entire world
soon become aware of
this fact and quickly
put a stop to the livestock
industry by following
an organic vegan lifestyle
for the sake of our planet
and future generations.

For more information
on Dr. Robert Goodland,
please visit
www.GoodlandRobert.com
Dr. Goodland’s books
are available at
www.Amazon.com
Download a free PDF
of the article “Livestock
and Climate Change”
at
www.WorldWatch.org/node/6294

Eco-conscious viewers,
please join us again
next Wednesday on
Planet Earth:
Our Loving Home
for the concluding episode
in our two-part series
featuring
Dr. Robert Goodland.
Thank you for watching
today’s program.
May our world be forever
blessed with the abundant
love from the Divine.

Involved viewers,
welcome to this week’s
edition of Planet Earth:
Our Loving Home,
the concluding episode
in our two-part
series featuring
acclaimed US
environmental scientist,
Dr. Robert Goodland,
who will further discuss
how animal product
production and
consumption
causes climate change
as well as address
other ways
to lessen generation
of greenhouse gases.
Let's start with
Lester Brown's conclusion.
He said worldwide
anthropogenic
greenhouse gas must be
reduced 80% by 2020.
That is going to be
a wrenching change.
But that is necessary.
I fully agree that
that should be the goal.
We're going to have to do
simultaneously all
possible means to prevent
climate catastrophe.

Regarded as
the “Conscience of
the World Bank,”
Dr. Goodland served
the Bank as a senior
environmental advisor
for 23 years.
Currently
he is a senior fellow
at the World Resources
Institute, a non-profit
global think tank that
conducts environmental
research and provides
solutions to governments,
companies and
communities regarding
ecology-related issues.

He has authored
or co-authored numerous
books on sustainable
economic development
and the environment,
serves as
Metropolitan Chair of
the Ecological Society of
America, and is
the past president of the
International Association
for Impact Assessment.
In 2008, he received the
first International Union
for Conservation of
Nature’s Coolidge Medal
for his outstanding
contributions to
environmental conservation.

In October 2011,
the Gwangju NGO
Global Forum was held
at South Korea’s Chonnam
National University
and featured a talk
by Dr. Goodland entitled
““Food and
Climate Change: Risk
and Opportunity for
Korea and the World.”
The event was part of the
2011 Gwangju Summit
of the Urban Environment
Accords where mayors
and professionals from
more than 100 cities
around the world
gathered in Gwangju City
to discuss pressing
environmental issues
facing urban areas.

Some of the
distinguished attendees
included Lester Brown,
founder and president
of the US-based
Earth Policy Institute,
Amina Mohamed,
Deputy Executive Director
of the United Nations
Environment Program,
and Dr. Joan Clos,
Executive Director of the
United Nations Human
Settlements Program
(UN-HABITAT).

Dr. Goodland believes
that implementing
a carbon tax is a step
all governments should
take as part of a program
to address climate change.
In November 2011,
the Australian government
enacted a carbon tax to
lessen carbon emissions.
Starting July 2012,
the 500 highest polluting
corporations in Australia
are subject to the tax.

We have to get a tax
on greenhouse-gas
emissions.
Some people call it
a carbon tax.
The moment you get the
market to speak the truth,
then a lot of these
problems will be solved.
This tax must be applied
domestically,
but also to imports.
If a country like China
imports a lot of beef
and livestock feed,
chicken feed, pig feed
from the Amazon, then
the carbon embodied in
that trade has to be taxed.

Like other experts,
Dr. Goodland believes
all nations should
turn away from coal
and other fossil fuels
as energy sources
as fast as possible,
but also feels there is
a misperception that this
is the most cost-effective
solution to global warming
and that by simply
taking this action
we will be able to rapidly
reverse the current
situation of accelerating
climate change.

Chris Mentzel, the chief
executive officer of
a US-based clean-energy
consulting firm notes that
a one-percent reduction
in worldwide
meat consumption would
produce the same benefit
as a US$3 trillion
solar energy investment.

The biggest answer that
most people think
will help prevent
climate catastrophe is
a massive switch from
fossil fuel, that’s coal,
gas, oil, from fossil fuel
over to sustainable energy,
wind, solar, tidal,
geothermal,
some small hydro maybe.
But that transition
from fossil fuel to
sustainable energy,
it’s essential but it’s too slow.
Whatever you do,
it’s going to take
at least 20 years
from 2010 to 2030, and
most scientists say you
cannot wait until 2030.

The other thing about
the transition
from fossil fuel to
sustainable energy,
it’s immensely expensive.
Just think of Choi Yul’s
(President of the Korea
Green Foundation’s) talk
this morning that you
have nuclear reactors
in Korea and you import
US$2 billion worth
of coal every year.
Just imagine how
expensive it’s going to be
to change those figures.
So it's essential,
but only for the long term.
It cannot prevent climate
catastrophe in time.

The transport sector,
all of the cars
on the road only emit
six-billion tons (of carbon).
So I know there's a lot of
attention devoted
to more fuel-efficient cars
or getting plug-in
hybrid cars.
And that's good, and
it should be accelerated.
But frankly, it doesn't
help much as reducing
your own intake of
livestock products.

About half the world’s
grain harvest is diverted
to feeding livestock.
Another portion is
consumed in producing
biofuels.
In the US, 37% of annual
corn production goes to
creating corn ethanol.
With one billion people
starving or malnourished
in our world, food crops
should be reserved
for human consumption,
rather than livestock
or energy production.

A prompt repeal of all
subsidies for agro-fuels
from oil seeds and grains.
Human food cannot be
allowed to compete
with vehicle fuels.
There just isn't enough
food to go around
to permit that.
And we have to
halt deforestation
and forest fires.
Those have to be
reversed on a very large-
scale, particularly
tropical forests,
particularly
the Amazon forest,
and switch deforestation
over to regeneration,
expand the capacity
of forests to sequester
greenhouse gases.

Considering
the long lifespan of
carbon dioxide
in the atmosphere,
lessening the release of
shorter-lived greenhouse
gases such as methane
and nitrous oxide,
both with high global
warming potentials,
is a quicker way to
mitigate climate change
compared to simply
limiting carbon dioxide
emissions.

In 2009, Dr. Goodland
and his colleague
Jeff Anhang published
an article in
World Watch Magazine
entitled “Livestock
and Climate Change”
which concludes at least
51% of human-induced
global greenhouse gas
emissions come from
the cycle of producing
and consuming livestock.
The article also states
the following:

“According to the FAO
(Food and Agriculture
Organization),
37% of human induced
methane comes from
livestock.
Although methane warms
the atmosphere
much more strongly
than does CO2,
its half-life
in the atmosphere
is only about 8 years,
versus at least
100 years for CO2.
As a result, a significant
reduction in livestock
raised worldwide would
reduce greenhouse gases
(GHGs) relatively
quickly compared with
measures involving
renewable energy
and energy efficiency.”

So bottom line of
this opportunity,
a reduction in livestock
may be the only way
to stop global warming
in 5 to 10 years.
That's the main opportunity.
The other thing related
to this is a shift from beef
to other animals
doesn't help very much.
Some people say,
"Oh, I'll give up Bulgogi
(barbecued beef),
but I'll eat Tonkatsu
(pork cutlet) instead."
It doesn't help much,
nor does eating chicken.

And the reason for that is
the respiration,
the carbon dioxide
emitted by: pigs, cows,
and chickens is roughly
the same per kilogram
of body weight.
It's about two watts
per kilogram.
There's slight variation,
but not enough
to help the climate.
Therefore, switching
from beef to pork,
or beef to pork to chicken
won't help solve
climate risk.
The only thing you can do
is to reduce livestock
intake yourselves.

Upon reviewing
Dr. Goodland’s article,
in December 2009
the Food and Agriculture
Organization of
the United Nations
(FAO) invited him
for an expert consultation
on greenhouse-gas
emissions and mitigation
potentials
in animal agriculture.
In his recommendations,
he called for the FAO to
work with governments
so that they can provide
livestock producers
with adequate support
in obtaining alternative
livelihoods.
If everyone in the world
would adopt the simple,
but most powerful
practice of following
an animal-free diet,
we could halt
the detrimental effects
of global warming
in a short period.

(President) Choi
this morning mentioned
that some people
go vegetarian.
That's even better.
That would be
absolutely brilliant.
Climatically
effective alternatives to
eating livestock include
any plant-based foods.
If you find it difficult
to make a transition
from meat, then you can
eat meat analogs.

You all know Tonkatsu,
pork chops.
Well, there's a new one
in (South) Korea –
Konggas (soy cutlet).
So the switch to Konggas
would make
a huge difference.
By the way, it would also
make us all a lot
healthier and less obese.

The change of diet would
reduce deforestation,
and forest burning
for cattle ranches,
particularly
in the Amazon Basin,
where a lot of
Chinese pig food and
chicken food comes from.
And allowing
regeneration of the forest
would absorb much more
greenhouse gas very fast.
I think that regeneration
of forests is the only way
to create a large-scale
capacity
to sequester today's
atmospheric carbon.

If you replace
animal products with
alternatives, the world
will more easily feed
the 9 to 10-billion people
expected by 2050.
If global hunger
and starvation is a big
motivation for you,
then one of the best ways
to do it is to get people
to switch and reduce
their livestock production.

Supreme Master Ching Hai
strongly advocates
the global adoption
of the organic
plant-based diet as
the best and fastest way
to end our climate crisis.
Speaking in a video
message presented
during a November 2010
climate change
conference in the UK,
Supreme Master Ching Hai
addressed why
this diet is so powerful
and the greatest tool
we have at our disposal.

We can prevent
more than 20 million
meat-related deaths
worldwide per year
if we turn
to the vegan diet.
No more suffering
for loved ones,
no more early separations,
no more anguish
for ourselves and others;
and we will enjoy
naturally longer,
healthier, lovelier,
happier lives.

Even without the
“civilization busters”
threatening
our planet’s survival,
an organic vegan diet
would immensely improve
the quality of our lives;
spiritually also.
It can curb the water
and food crises
and restore nature’s
life-support systems.
It also happens
to be the most rapid,
cost-effective,
and the only feasible
climate solution,
one that every nation
can easily implement.

We sincerely thank you,
Dr. Robert Goodland
for revealing the truth
that the livestock industry
is primarily responsibility
for climate change.
May you have continued
success in your
invaluable research
on preserving
the environment
and our precious planet.

For more information
on Dr. Robert Goodland,
please visit
www.GoodlandRobert.com
Dr. Goodland’s books
are available at
www.Amazon.com
Download a free PDF
of the article “Livestock
and Climate Change”
at
www.WorldWatch.org/node/6294

Thank you for watching
this week’s episode of
Planet Earth:
Our Loving Home.
May all lives be filled
with heavenly harmony
and love.